Discourse Markers in Second Language Acquisition

Zuloaga, Margarita Borreguero; Thörle, Britta

doi:10.1075/lia.7.1.001in

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These asymmetries concern both the range of functions that L2 learners are able to convey with respect to L1 speakers, and the variety of DMs implemented to convey a given function. Different studies (Bardel 2003;Nigoević 2012;De Marco 2015;Jafrancesco 2015) show that L2 speakers usually manifest less variation in both respects, especially at beginner level, while there is a growth in both the use of DMs and the functions represented together with the progress of proficiency (Trillo 2002;Borreguero & Thörle 2016). The research on DMs in L2 Italian is rather vast (Andorno 2008;Borreguero 2009 and sub.…”

Section: Discourse Markers In L2 Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Acquisition of Italian Discourse Markers as a Function of Studying Abroad

Cristofaro

Badan

2019

Corpus Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discourse Markers In L2 Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Acquisition of Italian Discourse Markers as a Function of Studying Abroad

Cristofaro

Badan

2019

Corpus Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It would be necessary to analyse the more than 150 instances of the adverb oui in our corpus in order to distinguish between its use in negation and as a planning discourse marker(Borreguero and Thörle 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral discourse competence-in-performance

Cañada

Ferrero

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mastering a language implies being able to deploy a wide variety of speech genres (Bakhtin 1952–1953). However, the features which define these genres are often obscure to students or ‘occluded’ in the sense used by Swales (1996). In this paper, nine dialogues between B1-level French learners in the context of an oral exam are analysed in order to describe the degree of dialogic competence-in-performance (Weigand 2017) achieved. Because these dialogues were of two types, an exchange of opinions and a guided interview, our analysis reveals hybrid results. This hybridity affects the opening and closing sequences of the dialogue, floor-taking in the central part and the linguistic resources used by the students to give their opinions. These findings identify formative needs as well as the indicators of achievement that are required to assess students’ oral competence-in-performance.

show abstract